• Aucun résultat trouvé

Context-based visual feedback recognition

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Partager "Context-based visual feedback recognition"

Copied!
195
0
0

Texte intégral

Figure

Figure  1-1:  Two examples  of modern  interactive  systems.  MACK  (left)  was  designed to  study face-to-face  grounding  [69]
Figure  1-2:  Contextual  recognition  of  head  gestures  during  face-to-face  interaction with a conversational  robot
Figure  2-2:  Mel,  an  interactive  robot,  can  present  the  iGlassware  demo  (table  and copper  cup  on  its right)  or  talk  about  its own  dialogue  and sensorimotor  abilities.
Table  2.1:  How  to  activate  and  deactivate  the  speech  interface  using  three  modes:
+7

Références

Documents relatifs

Our present objective is to demonstrate –by a proof of concept– that a search engine enhanced by implicit relevance feedback driven by eye gaze analysis could be implemented and used

For this experiment, the emotion fingerprint was constructed by aggregating the emotion values of all users. A big challenge is to identify the correct expected emotions and

Similarly, in our own work [15], we have shown that we can predict a number of visualization task types and user characteristics using simple machine learning techniques

We would like to underline the fact that, by explaining this process of an inward vision, physicians (Timothy Bright, Thomas Willis) have discovered that the power of

The purpose of this project is to determinate relationships between heterogeneous categories of data (physiological and emotional) and to study their impact on

In contrast, our convex method finds distance vectors from the convex hull of each class to the training samples (not the convex hull) of the other classes and uses a weight- ing

A real-time, haptics- enabled simulator for cell centered indentation has been devel- oped which utilizes the atomic force microscopy data (mechanical and geometrical properties

Gaze-congruity effects in Study 2 (indexed by reciprocal RT, multiplied by 100) for (A) young versus older participants, in response to supraliminal versus subliminal cues, averaged